My favorite cheesy TV Christmas special

Here's a holiday excerpt from the book I wrote about growing up in the 60s (that would make a GREAT holiday gift).   Order it here. 

I still can’t fathom why anyone watched the ANDY WILLIAMS variety show on NBC if they didn’t own a color TV. It was so wholesome your teeth ached. Whatever “edge” the show had was provided by the Osmond Family. But it was in color and production numbers always featured grinning All-American yahoos in brightly colored sweaters holding brightly colored balloons. Not having a color TV and not being gay I never watched THE ANDY WILLIAMS SHOW… except…

During their Christmas special.

It was the one time of year Andy had his beautiful family on the show and this became a 60s American tradition. Mom and dad and the Williams kinder would sing Carols, exchange presents, and their message of love and holiday good cheer would absolutely entrance you. That’s not why I watched it, of course. I wanted to screw Andy’s wife.

Claudine Longet (Mrs. Williams) was a willowy brunette with exquisite doe eyes and luscious lips. Laura Petrie but French. She was also a successful recording artist but believe me, if she looked like Charles De Gaulle she couldn’t give away one record. But I found her incredibly sexy, even when she was singing Silent Night in front of a crucifix. She and Andy would divorce in the 70s and two years later she shot her boyfriend, Olympic skier Spider Sabich to death. I still wanted to screw her, but not as much.

So as enjoyable as those holiday shows were in the mid 60s, watching them now on PBS they take on a whole new level of absurdity. Two of their kids are named Noelle and Christian. How much more seriously can you take Christmas? And yet, twelve years later, there’s mom in a different winter wonderland with a loaded revolver. She was ultimately convicted on a lesser charge and married her defense attorney.

I’ll be on parole for Christmas.

Friday Questions

Friday Questions – a holiday tradition.

Kyle Burress starts us off:

I stumbled across this blog looking for information on some of the minor characters on 'Cheers' ie Tim, Alan, Steve, Hugh just to name a few.

I was curious as to how and why some characters such as Paul Vaughn from seasons 1-2 or others such as Hugh Maguire, Larry Harpel, Mark Arnott, or Jack Knight only appeared in a season or two but had several appearances throughout those seasons suddenly just disappeared. Was it a case of local talent just getting their shot? Then you have others like Alan Koss, Tim Cunningham, Steve Giannelli and Pete Schreiner that appear in multiple seasons and a couple throughout the entire course of the series. I know they were all minor characters but why were some featured for a majority of the series and some for only a season or two?

The barflies were usually paid as extras unless they had a line of dialogue. Extras don’t make much money. And even a line or two a few times a season is not enough bonus loot to support a family. To my knowledge these people moved on to better paying jobs or careers.

Ironically, several of them wrote spec episodes of CHEERS and invariably their character would be the star of the episode.

A few of the extras caught on and started receiving more and more lines – like Al Rosen (“Man Who Said Sinatra”), Tom Babson (Cliff was always giving him shit about going to law school), and Phil Perlman (Rhea and Heide’s dad). In later years we used Paul Willson as a recurring character, but that was different. Paul was hired as an actor, not a background player.

MW makes his FQ debut:

I hadn't seen the first year of Cheers since the first year of Cheers, but recently Netflixed through it. What was amazing beyond the fact that the characters and humor were perfect with the very first episode, is that the show hasn't aged. Aside from hair styles, the size of the bar phone and a few baseball references, it's as absolutely fresh today as it was then. The jokes and characters still land today as they did then. So many shows, even truly great comedies, show their age, but Cheers doesn't. Since you were involved with the show pretty much from the beginning, how did you work to make it timeless. Was that a concern of the creators or was that just an outcome of the way you all worked?

You can see why I used his question – so many compliments. Thank you, MW. The short answer is we made the problems universal. The issues that the characters are wrestling with are relatable and the same as today’s issues. Relationship problems, addiction problems, finding your place in the world, the need to be accepted – these are timeless.

The Charles Brothers didn’t set out to do a show that would stand the test of time, but they did want to do a show that concentrated on the characters – their emotions and humanity. It was not enough that the audience found them funny, they had to care about them. To me, that’s what makes a lasting sitcom.

From John G:

You and I are both huge fans of Dan Ingram, quite possibly the greatest top 40 radio DJ of all time(you won't find anyone saying that in LA though). I would love to hear anything and everything you have about him, especially for the benefit of those who do not know him.

Even though I’m from LA and had the privilege of hearing the Real Don Steele and Robert W. Morgan in their ‘60s heyday, I still feel Dan Ingram on WABC New York was the greatest disc jockey of the Top 40 era. For voice quality, spontaneity, timing, warmth, and humor there’s never been anyone who could touch him. Any one random show of Dan Ingram has more laugh-out-loud moments than a month's worth of anyone else's. He has one of the greatest comic minds I’ve ever seen. I think I’m pretty quick, but I’m not even in this guy’s league.

Watching him do his show was wild. For every hilarious thing he said on the air there were usually five he said off the air that he COULDN’T say on the air.

Okay, so you want a story. Dan also had an amazing voice over career. For about thirty years you heard his voice on hundreds, maybe thousands of commercials. I was in the studio with him one day during a New York visit and mentioned that I recognize his voice on lots of commercials but no one in LA knows him. This is what he said:

“When I walk out of a building I don’t want people saying, ‘Hey, there goes Dan Ingram.’ I want them saying, ‘Hey, who is that guy getting into a Rolls?”

Dan is retired now, living mostly in Florida now. For the millions of people who grew up listening to him, he’s a national treasure.

And finally, DrBOP asks a question about gambling on sports.

What were/are the guidelines for broadcasters vis-a-vis laying down the occasional bet? How about broadcasters being sources of "inside info" for fantasy, or other, gambling interests? Ever see it? Ever happen?

This is hazy, but I think as a broadcaster I had to sign some document saying I wouldn’t gamble. I never bet on sports anyway so it was always a non-issue.

I know announcers that do gamble on sports, and even with all their “inside information” they usually lose.

I did have a Rotisserie team when I was broadcasting for the Orioles. Conflicts arose when one of the players for the opposing team was on my Rotisserie team and hit a home run. My call had to be muted, but inside I was going “YES!!!!”

By the way, with all my “inside information,” my team finished second to last. George Bell of the Blue Jays killed me in the second half.

What’s your Friday Question, and happy holiday shopping this weekend.

"Afternoon, everybody!"

Most laughs, when you’re doing a multi-camera show, have to be earned.  Strangers have to laugh.  And that can be especially hard if the studio audience is not that familiar with the show. Example: A network picks up a series but you need to film episodes before it airs. So maybe you show the pilot or have the warm up guy brief the audience, but you’re truly at the mercy of who you get. Add to that, studio audiences are sometimes bussed in to fill the seats. So your show might be an edgy romantic comedy about Millennials and your audience is all over ninety.

We had a tough time the first year of CHEERS. Looking back, I believe season one was our best year, but at the time you’d never know it. Audiences were hot and cold. And of course, any running gag was completely lost on them. I remember once George Wendt doing a Norm entrance that died. He questioned whether that "entrance" routine was even worth doing. I reminded him that this audience didn’t know it was a running bit, but once the show’s on the air they’ll get it.

By season eleven they applauded the minute he entered and said, “Afternoon, everybody.” Which brings up the flip side of this issue. As hard as it was early on to evoke laughter, that’s how easy it was during the latter years. Once CHEERS became a giant hit then demand for tickets was huge.

And now audiences came primed to love it. They were just thrilled to see their favorite CHEERS characters live and in person. As a result, they laughed at everything. We’d watch the rough cut a week later and say, “What are they laughing at?” Not that there weren’t some great jokes those last few seasons, but they certainly weren’t earned.

And the Norm entrances went through the roof. I always wanted to try an experiment.  The idea was vetoed, but this is what I proposed: For one take during the last year when audiences were howling at everything, I wanted to do the following Norm entrance:

NORM ENTERS.

NORM: Afternoon, everybody.

ALL: Norm!

WOODY: What would you like, Mr. Peterson?

NORM: A beer.

I seriously believe that in Year Eleven “A beer” would have gotten a monster laugh. That’s what I mean by not earning it.

Like I said, it would have been an experiment and we wouldn’t have used it, but I do wonder how many lines made it through those last few seasons that could have been better? Oh well – I’m sure I paid for it on other shows.

What sitcoms do I wish I had written for?

Here’s a Friday Question that became an entire post because I wrote too much.

Mel Agar asks:

You've been blessed to write for some of the greatest television shows in history. Is there a show -- either from the past or a contemporary series -- that you wish you'd written for?

There are a bunch. Some are from the ‘50s so I’d be really old now if I had. Still…

THE PHIL SILVERS SHOW – To this day one of the most brilliantly written sitcoms of all-time thanks to the genius of Nat Hiken. How many comedy shows hold up sixty years later? When I showed an episode last year to my USC class they howled. When Millennials think an old black-and-white show starring a middle-aged bald man is a riot you know you’re on to something. To get on that staff you had to have chops. Neil Simon wrote for THE PHIL SILVERS SHOW.

YOUR SHOW OF SHOWS  or the later similar CAESAR'S HOUR– These were live variety shows starring Sid Caesar that put together the Mt. Rushmore of writing staffs. Mel Brooks, Carl Reiner, Woody Allen, Larry Gelbart, Neil Simon – and those were just the names you know about. Everyone on that staff was a hall-of-famer.

THE DICK VAN DYKE SHOW – If I had to pick only one it would be this show. That’s why it was so much fun earlier this year actually writing a spec DICK VAN DYKE SHOW. This series was so far superior to any other sitcom at the time (the early to mid ‘60s) that it was like Babe Ruth in his prime playing in a beer league.

THE SMOTHERS BROTHERS SHOW – This would be the only other variety show I would have liked to have written. The political humor and satire of the show was far ahead of its time. Among the staff writers was Steve Martin. I actually inquired about getting a job on that show. I was 17 at the time and had never written anything nor knew the first thing about how you do it, but that didn’t stop me from applying. For reasons I still can’t fathom, they hired someone else. A cool footnote: Years later when we won one of our WGA Awards the presenter was Tommy Smothers. It’s nice getting an award from someone who rejected you,

THE MARY TYLER MOORE SHOW – For my money the gold standard of character-driven comedy. When David Isaacs and I started out, that was our ultimate goal. We learned how to write sitcoms by studying THE MARY TYLER MOORE SHOW. We wrote a spec MARY TYLER MOORE SHOW (which got us our assignment with THE JEFFERSONS – the two shows are so much alike). And one of the writers of MTM really liked our spec and was trying to get us in to do a freelance assignment. But another freelancer turned in a script that apparently was so awful that the producers decided not to take chances on any other newcomers that season.

THE BOB NEWHART SHOW – From MTM (Camelot for writers), and like THE MARY TYLER MOORE SHOW but edgier, more subversive, and at times, funnier. The tone was set by gifted showrunners Tom Patchett & Jay Tarses. Never got to do a BOB NEWHART SHOW, but Tom & Jay moved down the hall to create and run THE TONY RANDALL SHOW. We did get a freelance assignment on that series, which led to our first staff writing gig.

ALL IN THE FAMILY – We sort of came close. We did get to pitch story ideas to the producers, but they didn’t buy any.

TAXI – From James Brooks and many of the same writers of THE MARY TYLER MOORE SHOW, this was such a smart and funny show. And talk about a great writing staff: James Brooks, Stan Daniels, Ed. Weinberger, The Charles Brothers, Barry Kemp, Sam Simon, Ken Estin, David Lloyd, and freelance scripts by Earl Pomerantz. The final year of TAXI we were invited to write an episode, but it was also the first year of CHEERS and David and I had our hands full trying to get that series off the ground. We also wrote five CHEERS episodes that season so there wasn’t a lot of spare time.

So there you have it, but I sure don't feel cheated.   The shows I was fortunate enough to work on were extraordinary. I do feel incredibly blessed and felt so at the time. To have even written one episode from CHEERS, MASH, FRASIER, or THE SIMPSONS is amazing. We wrote multiple episodes of each (40 CHEERS). You can’t believe the sense of pride there is in knowing that something you wrote decades ago is still being shown and still making people laugh. And I’m not 90.

The holidays in Hollywood

Nowhere is the message and spirit of the season revered like in Hollywood.  (It even has “Holly” in its name.) To make sure everyone in the industry has sufficient time to spread the blessings of Christmas to all of humanity they take the entire month of December off. And by Christmas blessings I mean sending out award consideration screeners and by humanity I mean eligible voters.

Executives can now spend more time with their families. Usually they have to be fired… I mean, quit before they realize that is important.

But if you have a project you’re trying to sell or business you need addressed, fear not. Right after the first of the year everyone is back.

For a week.

Then it’s time for Sundance. That’s most of January. But everyone is still on the case – if you have a film at Sundance.

February features the Presidents Day weekend. And by weekend I mean week. After all, the ski season is coming to an end, only a few more chances to take the private jet up to Aspen. More time to spend with the family – unless school is in session, in which case, more time to spend with Katzenberg.

But after that there’s no rest for the weary. Business is back in full force. Until spring break. But that could be five, even six weeks.

On the other hand, everyone comes back refreshed and recharged for the big May and June push. TV upfronts, summer movie releases, NBA playoffs.

Fortunately, July finally rolls around, and it’s time to take the summer off.

Thank God the last half of September is when the Toronto Film Festival is. That’s a good two weeks.

But it’s nose-to-the-grindstone time from October until Thanksgiving, or, more accurately, the week before Thanksgiving. And Thanksgiving begins the “holidays.”

Where does the year go?

For your viewing pleasure

Here is that ten minute one act play I wrote and directed recently that was part of the "Hollywood Shorts" program at the Whitefire Theatre in Studio City.   It's called WAITING FOR GO and stars Paul Pape and Liz Bliss.   Thanks to Paul for arranging to have it taped.  It's one camera so obviously the production values aren't STAR WARS.  But you'll get the idea.   Thanks to all concerned, especially Paul & Liz who were a dream cast.

Confessions of a night person

The U.S. Army once had a recruiting slogan that proclaimed, “We do more by 9:00 in the morning than most people do all day!” Excuse me, but… that’s an incentive? By 9:00 in the morning I’m hopefully still sleeping.

I must admit I’m a night person. Always have been. Practically every job I’ve ever had since high school was a night job. Of course, now that I think about it, I bet I would have sold more Amway products door to door if I didn’t start out every night at midnight.

I know a lot of writers who are morning people. They get up at dawn, go right to work, and get as much done as the Army without cleaning toilets. Notice in that Army slogan they never specify exactly what they do? The truth is, a lot of potatoes get peeled, floors get buffed, and trenches get dug before 9.

But I prefer working late at night. It’s quiet for one thing, and when I write during the day I’m always wondering – what’s going on out there that I’m missing? I never feel that way when the option is watching Carson Daly.

Morning writers contend that they can enjoy the day more knowing they’ve already done their allotted work. That makes great sense to me. Until the alarm clock sounds. Then I’m thinking, “What the fuck?! I don’t get up this early to go to the goddamn Rose Parade. I’m going to drag myself out of bed to write three scenes for this spec screenplay that no one is going to buy?”

About ten years ago, when I was hosting Dodger Talk on XTRA 1150, I filled in on the morning show for about a month. The program director then offered me the position full-time. I graciously declined. He asked why? I’d be done at 9:00 and then have the whole rest of the day to write and direct. I said, “Yes, but see, here’s the thing: by 9:00 I’M FUCKING DEAD!!!” I don’t know how morning men do it. Like I said, this was ten years ago and I’m just now catching up on the sleep I lost.

There’s also a practical reason why I like to write during the wee hours. Lots of writers feel they have to finish a scene before they can put it down for the day. So they’ll sit for as long as it takes to wrestle that bad boy to the ground.

I’m the opposite. If I’m stuck on a tough story point or a long character speech I just stop – in the middle of a sentence even. I find that it’s much easier to solve story problems when I’m relaxed. So I’ll go to sleep and let my subconscious work on it awhile. Invariably, in the morning, after just mulling it over in bed or taking a shower, the solution will present itself. Then I’ll return to the script to finish the scene.

So maybe I don’t get that much done before 9:00 but from 9:15-9:25 I kick ass!

And it's great here in Hawaii.  Because of the time zone, I can work late at night and still be getting lots done by 9:00 AM at home.

How about you? Are you a morning or night person, and why?

This is a re-post from five years ago.

Siri's revenge

Aloha from Maui.  Four years ago when I was here this happened:  Here is a re-post from 2011. 

I’ve mentioned in the past how I've pulled my share of practical jokes. (My partner, David Isaacs and I wrote all of the Bar Wars episodes of CHEERS). Well, I’m not the only one in my family.

At the moment I’m still in Maui. I’ve become friends with one of the waiters at the Grand Wailea poolside burger shack. (He refilled my ice tea once. I love the man.) I told him my son Matt was due to arrive the next day and would he help play a prank on him? Matt is an engineer for Apple computers and as you can imagine, there’s nothing he loves more than people asking for tech support (myself included). So I said to my waiter chum, “When Matt comes tomorrow tell him you’ve got a problem with your Mac laptop and that I said he’d be happy to help you.”

Sure enough – next day, we’re at lunch, the waiter ambles by, and asks Matt if he’d look at his laptop. Although steam was escaping from his ears, Matt graciously said he would. At that point we let him in on the joke.

He said he would get back at me.

A few nights later my wife and I are at dinner with two other couples. I just got the new iPhone4S and am showing off the new Siri feature. I ask her when the Superbowl is? She didn’t understand the question. So I ask her again but with more of a ‘tude this time. I said, “When is next year’s Superbowl, bitch?”

She answers: “I don’t know, Jackass!”

You can imagine the laugh this got at the table.   Getting royally insulted by my iPhone.

And as we were driving home a new concern crossed my mind. Based on the input she receives, Siri “learns” things. Does she now just assume I'm a giant  asshole? I mean, calling me a Jackass was pretty rude!”   Was I forever to be hated by my cellphone?

Well, it turns out Matt programmed Siri to call me that. You can do that I guess.

Good one, Matt!  

I’m currently reading the Steve Jobs book. In it, I've learned he loved pulling practical jokes. I’ve always been proud that my son works for Apple Computer. But now I know, he really belongs.

For the record: Siri now calls me Kenny. At least to my face. Behind my back – God knows.

Friday Questions

Take a break from shopping online to sample some FQ’s.  They're FREE!

Mork starts us off.

Hugh Wilson has talked about the time CBS asked him to write a zany, wacky episode of "WKRP in Cincinnati"; the resulting episode, "Fish Story" (which featured, among other things, Johnny Fever and Venus Flytrap getting drunk on the air), was so against everything he thought was good that he took his name off the episode and used the pseudonym Raoul Plager for his writing credit. The episode ended up being the highest-rated episode of the entire series.

Have you ever written anything that either a) was so completely against what you thought was funny but ended up working anyway; or b) worked, but you had absolutely no idea *why* it worked?

If I’m being honest, when David Isaacs and I did a quick rewrite on MANNEQUIN we didn’t anticipate the film would be so well-received. But we’re not complaining.

There are a couple of episodes of CHEERS that we wrote that at the time we thought were okay, nothing special, but people absolutely loved them. Again, thank you Comedy Gods. They were “Jumping Jerks” (where the guys skydive) and “The Big Kiss-Off” (where Sam and Woody have a bet to see who can kiss Rebecca first).  I'm thrilled you love 'em. 

More often however, the reverse is true. You write a show you think is going to kill, and then you see the final result and go “What happened?”

Anthony has a question about pilots.

I've noticed some shows in recent years (though, naturally, I'm hard-pressed to name one off the top of my head) that featured the lead character's narration in the first few minutes of the pilot, to establish the characters and premise...and then it goes away for the rest of the episode (if not series). Do you think this is a lazy way to handle exposition or is it helpful to the audience--maybe even necessary given the shortened run time of shows these days?

Yes. To me that’s lazy writing. Instead of just baldly telling the audience what you want them to know, show them. It’s difficult, but part of the exercise of a pilot is to work in exposition in an entertaining, seamless way.

Narration is especially lazy if you drop it right after the introduction. It’s one thing if narration is an ongoing part of your series (a la THE MIDDLE or ARRESTED DEVELOPMENT), but if a pilot starts out with “This is the story of….” or "Meet...." I’m usually gone.

From Ray, a question about episode titles:

Especially among the more dedicated of fans, those titles are known by rote and become shorthand for discussion. Yet not all shows display them at the start of episodes. Some, which have patterns to them (Lou Grant's history of all one word titles, or the Friends "the one with..." conceit) never displayed, best as I can recall. I watched MASH as many times as five a day during the prime time run when the syndication rules allowed such repetition, but I never knew in those pre-internet days what any of them were called.

And thus the question, or series of questions. Who decides whether to display the title of an episode on a series- network, showrunner, someone else? How did you feel about it as a writer? And did the knowledge of its presence before an episode ever influence your writing to even the smallest extent?

Generally, it’s a creative decision by the showrunner. I personally don’t like showing the episode title. In some cases the title might give away a key plot point.

Also, there are times when the show changes so much during the week of production that by the time it’s filmed the original title means nothing. When we were doing that ill-fated series for Mary Tyler Moore we had an episode involving everybody getting real amped up on chocolate-covered coffee beans. (Watch out for those things!) But we did major story work the week of production and eliminated the beans altogether. And yet the title of the episode: “Beans.”

Other times the title might refer to a line of dialogue in the episode that taken out of context looks like a non sequitur. I don’t want the viewer trying to decipher the meaning of the title instead of focusing on the show itself.

Adding to the confusion, sometimes a production company will change the title later on. We wrote an episode of OPEN ALL NIGHT called “Missing One Geek.” They changed it to “Terry Runs Away.” We got nominated for a WGA Award for it, but when we saw the nominees in the paper we said, “What’s ‘Terry Runs Away’?”

And finally, from June Sullivan:

Hi Ken - are you a fan of House of Cards? I was wondering what is the deal with the coffee? Is it that the writer loves it and enjoys showcasing one of his habits? Or is a metaphor for something...but coffee drinking, serving, purchasing, and making is in almost every scene. I laughed recently when someone was asked if they wanted a cup of tea.

First off, I LOVE HOUSE OF CARDS.

As for the coffee, actors like to have business. They like things in their hands, they like crossing to get stuff, they like making stuff.  There's always coffee around.

Watch CHEERS. Sam Malone is always cutting lemons. The Coach is always cleaning glasses.

Since I don’t work on HOUSE OF CARDS, I’m just speculating, but maybe they all drink coffee because they keep such long hours and need the caffeine. What they should do is an episode where they all eat chocolate-covered coffee beans.

What’s your Friday Question?

What's your all-time biggest laugh?

Dinner table conversation between comedy writers can lead to some interesting discussions. Lots of schadenfreude of course – and that’s even before we order. But there are plenty of funny takes on the world, sports, pop culture, and sex (mostly the lack thereof).

Old vintage TV shows we loved is also a semi-popular topic (I say “semi” because we don’t like that we’re old enough to have written on many of these chestnuts). But the HONEYMOONERS was mentioned recently, and everyone perked up (that show was even before “our” time). I said that the biggest laugh I ever had was for the payoff of the “$99,000 Answer” episode. I won’t spoil it in case you haven’t seen it (in which case, GO SEE IT). But suffice to say the entire episode builds to one last joke and it’s a killer.  I was ten at the time and probably laughed for ten minutes. 

That led to a discussion of “what was the biggest laugh you ever had?” Preferably sober. More fun than hearing theirs (e.g. Monty Python) would be hearing yours? So I throw out that topic today. And please, don’t feel obligated to cite an example from MANNEQUIN 2. But think back – hopefully this will be a tough choice because you’ve had many big belly laughs in your life (not a tough choice because you have amnesia) – what moment, scene, one-liner, cartoon, stand up routine, America’s Funniest Home Video made you uncontrollably laugh the hardest, loudest, longest?

This is going to be one of those days where the comments are more interesting than the post. I, for one, look forward to your responses. If nothing else I bet it will illustrate how subjective comedy is. There will be some entries that other readers won’t think is funny at all. I’m also curious as to whether your single biggest laugh came as a child (like mine) or as an adult. Anyway, it should be fun. Put on your thinking caps and I’ll see ya in the comments section. Thanks.

TRUMBO: My review

Saw TRUMBO recently at a DGA screening. It was packed. I said to several of the members in line, “You realize this is about a WRITER, not a director, right?” But they wanted to see it anyway. And you should too, if you like Bryan Cranston (who doesn’t?), care about social injustice, or want to finally see Diane Lane juggle water tumblers.

The story is about Dalton Trumbo, a hugely successful novelist and screenwriter in the ‘40s who refused to cooperate with the witch hunting Committee on Un-American Activities and (along with others) was blacklisted in the ‘50s. To make a living he and other blacklisted writers were forced to churn out schlock B-movies at a fraction of their normal fee while using pseudonyms. It’s as if today Aaron Sorkin could only get work writing Women-in-Prison movies for direct-to-video under the name Candy Apple.

If John McNamara doesn’t win the WGA Best Screenwriting Award for this screenplay with this subject matter he never will. It’s got to be the ultimate crowd pleaser for THAT crowd.

Unfortunately, there is now a parallel to today’s events. Hopefully this film will enlighten some people as to the real dangers of blatant fear and mistrust (although those people are probably all home playing MORTAL COMBAT X).

TRUMBO is a little long and lecture-y at times, and I don’t know if you’d appreciate it as much if you have no connection to that world or time period, but I found it fascinating. And I could watch Bryan Cranston peel potatoes for two hours.

There were some other terrific performances. John Goodman is absolutely hilarious, Louis C.K. is proving to be one hell of a legitimate actor, and Helen Mirren, as always, is terrific.

One of my favorite things in the film is her portrayal of gossip columnist/barracuda, Hedda Hopper. At the time she wielded enormous power in Hollywood and was a reprehensible human being. A bitch with a capital C. How nice that that is becoming her legacy – not her power, not her influence – but her loathsome presence and empty soul. Roast in hell you bitch with a capital C.

Beyond that there are actors playing movie stars and those always feel more like impressions than real people. How do you make John Wayne seem real when the real John Wayne was a cartoon? This becomes less of an issue however, as movie audience gets younger. Very few Millennials will say Michael Stuhlbarg didn’t really capture Edward G. Robinson that well (I actually thought he did… and he really nailed Arnold Rothstein on BOARDWALK EMPIRE).

But hey, any movie where Otto Preminger is one of the heroes is worth seeing. And Kirk Douglas comes off well too.

Dalton Trumbo was a character. Very flamboyant, larger-than-life. After seeing the film I went on YouTube where there are some appearances by the real Dalton Trumbo and it’s amazing how well Cranston captured him. But that’s like saying an actor really had Abe Lincoln’s voice down. Unless you go to YouTube, you have no idea how Trumbo acted or sounded. So take my word on it.

Like I said, TRUMBO is worth seeing. I don’t think it’s going to receive many Oscars. But if it does win one, I suspect the Academy will adhere to tradition and not give it to them for twenty years.

Crickets

A few weeks ago I had a one act play I wrote and directed that was staged at the Whitefire Theatre in Studio City as part of their HOLLYWOOD SHORTS evening of one acts. I was blessed with a great cast – Liz Bliss and Paul Pape. And the response was tremendous. Big laughs every performance. I even got laughs on straight lines. That’s when you know they’re lovin’ it.

And then one night – death.

From the very start – silence. Jokes that usually got howls got a few titters. And those were charitable. As we comedy writers say – it was so quiet you could hear crickets. I fully expected to see tumbleweeds blow by during the scene.

It just so happened we were videotaping that night. I said to the cameraman it’s like he captured the Zapruder film.

So what happened? The actors gave their same sterling performance. There was no air conditioning problem or technical malfunction.

It was just a terrible audience. The cast of the WALKING DEAD. You needed a mirror to see if they were still breathing.

Needless to say, it was tough to sit through. My heart especially went out to the actors. Within the first two minutes they knew they were in trouble. And still they plowed forward – dragging a dead horse across the finish line to shoot it. We couldn’t get to the neighborhood bar fast enough.

But here’s the reality: It’s going to happen. That’s just the way it is. I don’t think there’s a successful stand-up comedian in the world who hasn’t absolutely bombed – probably multiple times.

It happens frequently on multi-camera sitcoms – even with a warm up man. You just get a dull audience. When Jay Tarses, a showrunner for MTM during the glory years, used to handle the warm up duties on THE BOB NEWHART SHOW and THE TONY RANDALL SHOW, if he got a bad house he turned on them. He’d say things like “Hey, your hearse is waiting.”

The thing to do is just shake it off. A bad audience is completely out of your control. You can try to analyze it. They were too old, the acoustics were bad, the show started late and they were tired, the weather was inclement, Mercury was in retrograde, one of the actors said Macbeth in the theater, etc. But it’s all bullshit. Just like parking tickets and common colds, you’re going to experience them once in awhile. No sense beating yourself up over it.

Obviously this is different from a performance that works in some places but not in others. Then it’s up to the creative team to make whatever changes are necessary to fix the problems. But when you’ve heard the material kill week after week and suddenly it just lays an egg, there’s nothing you can do other than shrug and have another Moscow Mule.

Truly, the hardest part is having friends lie and tell you the show was wonderful when it wasn’t. When you hear things like “Very enjoyable” “Really good work” and “We love you anyway” you know. When the theatre employees tell you that no one left in intermission – as if that means it’s a smash – again, you know.

But it’s all part of the beauty of live theater, which is a phrase only used by theater people when things are going badly. The trick is to just keep going. You’re not alone. I guarantee you there were performances where the great Shakespeare himself said, “I wonder if I can get into the plumbers’ union.”

Just keep going. Next week will be better. Or they can start lining up those Moscow Mules right now.

By the way, the following week -- HUGE laughs.   Thank God.  

The date which will live in infamy

Aloha.  It’s always a little strange to be in Hawaii on December 7th. That’s “the date which will live in infamy,” although as each year passes more and more young people have no idea what that means.

On this date in 1941 Japanese bombers attacked Pearl Harbor. That was, for the United States, the beginning of World War II. For that generation, it was their 9-11. And even though I didn’t come along until many years later, I heard about it all my life. I’m sure Millennials can’t conceive of a time when we won’t remember 9-11 but you'd be surprised -- time goes by shockingly fast.

There have been several movies about this historic event, most not so good – but by far the worst is PEARL HARBOR atrociously directed by Michael Bay. It’s basically a horribly written love triangle followed by a shit ton of bombing.

IN HARM’S WAY is another dud but at least has John Wayne.

Better is TORA TORA TORA, although the battle ships are miniature toys filmed in the tank at Paramount. But it’s a more balanced film and shows the actual planning – far more worthwhile than watching Kate Beckinsale try to deliver cringeworthy lines like, “Slow down, flyboy!” and “Every night I watch the sunset and soak up every last ray of its warmth and send it from my heart to yours.” Transformers wouldn’t even say that.

The best is probably FROM HERE TO ETERNITY from the ‘50s. You got your Hollywood star power in that one, from Burt Lancaster and Deborah Kerr (the famous beach love scene) to Sinatra who won an Academy Award (I wonder how many horse heads that cost the Godfather.).

If you're not familiar with this event, please check out a movie (except PEARL HARBOR) or book on the subject.  It's something you really oughtta know.  

So at least for a moment this day,  “Remember Pearl Harbor.” Especially if (like me) you’re in Hawaii. Like everything else, paradise comes with a price. And even though it happened a long long time ago now, let’s never forget.

Somebody should say this about Sinatra

As readers of this blog know, I am a huge Sinatra fan. Well… the Sinatra from the Capitol Records period in the ‘50s.  Any record he made while wearing a hat.   No matter how many people he roughed up, his singing during that period was extraordinary. 200 years from now people will still be listening to Sinatra (and hopefully watching MASH reruns).

This would have been his 100th birthday, which is a good excuse to stage tributes to him. CBS has one tonight – a biggie featuring a lot of rock stars. This to me is quite ironic since Sinatra loathed rock n’ roll. He didn’t understand it, he lashed out at it, made fun of it, and worse – tried to do it himself. ( Maybe if Ava Gardner had sung with Jefferson Airplane he would have gotten it. We’ll never know.)

Appropriately, there are no comedians honoring him on this show for a very good reason – Frank Sinatra was painfully unfunny. Sorry. There it is. Were he alive I’m sure some no neck thugs would be visiting me, but let’s get real. Listen to any Rat Pack concert recording. The jokes are all cringeworthy, racist, hostile, inside, and embarrassing.

Now you could say Sinatra just needed better writers, but that wouldn’t have helped. He had zero comic timing. Dino had comic timing. Sammy (poor Sammy) had comic timing. But Frank (and remember I love him) was to comedy what Sam Kinison was to the Great American Songbook.

His movie comedies were not much better. When I hosted the Neil Simon festival on TCM I screened COME BLOW YOUR HORN (Neil’s first play adapted into a film). It’s the story of two Jewish brothers in New York. Frank gave it that ring-a-ding-ding edge you rarely see in Jewish families.

And worse than not being funny– he thought he WAS funny. There’s nothing more excruciating than that. My heart goes out to the toadies and hangers-on who hung out with him and had to laugh at his horrible jokes 24/7. Especially Sammy who was the butt of those jokes. Frank’s idea of delivering a line was to break into “Amos & Andy.” Yes, it was from a different time but Jesus!

Sinatra was an absolute master at interpreting songs. He could infuse emotion into music like nobody before or since. He was more than an artist – he was a master. I remain in awe.  Again... during that period he wore hats. 

But when it comes to comedy, Nancy is funnier.

Tune in to a Levine marathon!

Two episodes by two Levines!  Tonight from 8:00-9:00 TV LAND is running back-to-back new episodes of INSTANT MOM.   Both were written by Annie Levine & Jonathan Emerson.  And the first one was directed by me.   Both are funny episodes.  Good jokes and they're in focus.  Thanks for watching, DVR'ing, buying!

That's some bad hat, Harry

Ever notice at the end of shows there are those cards that fill the screen with names of bizarre production companies, sometimes animated and sometimes with sound (“That’s some bad hat, Harry.”)? Those are called vanity cards. When writer/creators form their own production company (and they all do) they’re entitled to a vanity card.

The question is: what to do with it? When my partner David Isaacs and I got a series on CBS we had to create our vanity card. First we needed to come up with a name for our so-called entertainment conglomerate. Candidates included “13 and out”, “FU Money”, and “Tina Delgado is alive ALIVE!” We decided to just call it “Levine & Isaacs Productions”, thus extending the outer reaches of our creativity. Look, it’s on screen for like one second, so why not just go for ego under the guise of simplicity?

Some of these vanity cards are so cutesy and pretentious. We wanted to steer clear of that. Maybe the worst was Stephen J. Cannell's. You see him writing at the typewriter with an Emmy in the shot. He takes the paper out of the typewriter, flings it into the air, and its brilliance morphs into an animated version of his company's logo. Yikes!

Now for the visual.

Chuck Lorre fills his card with long fine print rants. That’s an ingenious idea but (a) we didn’t want to copy Chuck, and (b) who wants to do all that extra writing work?

We thought of showcasing our dads waving at the camera as a tribute to them. But then we realized, networks were going to think that was me and David and we didn’t need being blackballed for ageism while we were still in our 30s.

We considered baseball caps from our favorite teams. His was the Yankees but mine would change depending on who hired me to do play-by-play. So that was out. Then we figured, just use caps from our colleges – UCLA and the University of Miami. But UCLA raised my basketball tickets that year and the U of M was undergoing another scandal so we nixed that idea.

To animate something would be costly. And again, there was that fear that we would look incredibly full of ourselves.

So we settled on this. Did it in black and white because there was nothing on TV in black and white then. When it appeared, a little shimmer went across the screen but otherwise this was it. You’re welcome to download it and use it as your wallpaper or screen saver.


This is a re-post from five and a half years ago.

Friday Questions

Hard to believe it’s December already. Here are this week’s FQ's:

KAS gets us started with a question on everyone’s lips:

Where do you keep your Emmy? Can it be the featured photo in questions, please?!

Yes.  See: above.  I keep it in the dining room on a cabinet. If I were single I’d keep it around my neck.

Mark is up next.

My wife and I stopped watching a one hour drama because it seemed the characters never evolved and because of that it got rather boring.

But it seems that characters in comedies can't really develop, can they? What good would Norm be he stopped drinking beer? Or if Hawkeye started behaving like a Captain? Or if Frasier figured out his issues with women? Still, they need to kind of evolve, don't they? How do you handle that?

Characters have to evolve very slowly. And it is a dance. On the one hand, viewers might respond to a certain character for some reason and you want to keep fulfilling their expectations. But there is the danger that the character gets stale and the viewers lose interest. You’ve got to read the tea leaves.

Actors understandably get tired playing the same thing week after week. But remember, in success you’re looking at a hundred-plus episodes. You can’t make too many drastic changes.

There have been instances where shows have made significant changes and they've backfired -- in some cases killing the show.    Better to go too slow than too fast.  (Of course that's easy to say until you're trying to break stories for year five and everything has already been done.)

From Jerry:

What drives the decision of whether to do holiday themed episodes? Does the network like them and will request them? One of the writers has a great idea for a turkey getting stuck on someone's head?

Networks do like holiday themed shows. Sometimes they specifically ask for them so they can promote an entire night of “Christmas” shows or “Yom Kippur” shows, etc.  

As a showrunner, I tend to find them a pain-in-the-ass. How many variations of Christmas stories can you do?  Same with Thanksgiving?  And they usually have to end with warm fuzzy moments.  Ugh! 

One year on ALMOST PERFECT, we had Christmas decorations all around but made absolutely no mention of Christmas. It was just a regular episode that happened to take place in mid December. Personally, I think that was the best holiday show we ever did.

Boomska316 queries:

I was wondering how "Point Of View" was filmed? Was the actor playing Private Rich wearing a helmet cam or something?

No. There were no helmet cams in 1978. It was a pretty bulky camera the cameraman hoisted on his shoulder. Charles Dubin did a masterful job of directing that episode. I lost the Emmy for that show, but it still pisses me off more that HE lost the Emmy for that show.

And finally, from Grace:

Ken: how do shows handle it when one season picks up where the previous season ended? For instance, in the seventh-season finale of Frasier, Daphne and Niles decide to run off together in the Winnebago; in the season eight opener, they're in the same places in the same Winnebago in the same clothes as though the two scenes were made together. So I guess my question is are those sorts of scenes generally made together? Do you send the audience home and have the actors stay so everything looks the same? Do you take tons of photos and use the episode to restore everything when you return to work? I can't imagine how the writers would necessarily KNOW that they needed to do all that work, but I've seen it on a lot of shows, so obviously someone's planning.

All of the above. On some occasions they will film the “B” side of the cliffhanger that night and just have it in the can. But most of the time, yes, they take a ton of photos, and have the footage from the original cliff hanger scene so they’re able to match it pretty closely.   Reason:  the writers haven't figured out the solution to the cliffhanger yet.  They say, "we'll think of something over the hiatus." 

But sometimes waiting until next year creates problems. I worked on a series that had one of these cliffhangers, but did not film the “B” side at the time. And during that extended hiatus, one of the lead actors had cut his hair significantly. They had to make a custom wig for him (at considerable expense you can imagine).

At least that was fixable. A stickier problem is when an actor gains or loses twenty pounds during the hiatus.  And that happens more than you think. 

What’s your Friday Question?

SPOTLIGHT -- My review

I haven’t seen PAN, but so far SPOTLIGHT is the movie of the year in my humble but correct opinion. Imagine, a thoroughly engrossing film without a single explosion. Even more astonishing, a film that lives up to the hype.

Michael Keaton was way better in this than the FRASIER we wrote. Mark Ruffalo is incredible without being the Hulk. Liev Schreiber was very convincing playing Jewish. Stanley Tucci had a great part and excellent hairpiece. John Slattery is now and forever “Roger Sterling.” And Rachel McAdams is hot even when she’s researching.

The ‘70s brought us ALL THE PRESIDENT’S MEN and now we have ALL THE CARDINAL'S MEN. Writer/director Tom McCarthy and co-writer Josh Singer artfully tell the true story of the Boston Globe’s uncovering of the major scandal involving child molestation and the Catholic Church. I don’t think they’ll be selling SPOTLIGHT T-shirts and coffee mugs at the Vatican gift shop.

It has always been a comfort that we had investigative journalists courageously fighting bureaucracy to uncover scandals like this or Watergate. The Washington Post essentially brought down the President of the United States (and once again, THANK YOU). The Fourth Estate has served as our national watchdogs.

But what about the future?

With newspapers going belly up and TV news an utter joke, who is going to uncover the next insidious cover up? The Boston Globe was able to employ four staffers who just investigated stories. Compare that to Los Angeles Times that last week swept out thirty of their top reporters and editors. Can the LA Times even cover horoscopes now?

It’s strange to think that SPOTLIGHT felt like a period piece even though it was set in 2001 and 2002. I found myself nostalgic for the days when newsrooms weren’t deserted.

SPOTLIGHT delivers on all fronts. For my money, it’s the best movie of the year. Check your local paper for showtimes… assuming you still get a local paper.

Actors may not like it, but do it anyway

Actors hate getting interior direction (or parentheticals). They resent when the writer includes (angry) or (hurt) before a line of dialogue. They believe they should have the freedom to interpret and deliver the line the way they see fit. And to a large degree I agree with them. They need to breathe life into their characters and they don't want to be told how to react.   In some cases it can be downright insulting when you see (angry) as an indicator to the line: “Go the hell, you son of a bitch!”  (This is a common rookie mistake.) 

But there are times when interior direction is required. Dialogue can often be ambiguous and the writer needs to get across his intent. Let me give you an example.

This is a brief scene from my play, A OR B? It opens the second act. Ben and Abby are a young couple. They enter a hotel ballroom to attend a big charity dinner. Here is the scene with no indicators or stage direction whatsoever.

BEN: Let’s not let what just happened affect this evening.

ABBY: Don’t be so hot.

BEN: We won’t stay too long.

ABBY: I got nothing on.

BEN: Lucky me.

ABBY: You’re vibrating.

BEN: Hello?

ABBY: We got two bars in here.

BEN: No, Ted.

ABBY: You’ve got to hang up.

BEN: Later.

ABBY: What a tool.

BEN: This is not the place.

ABBY: I’m just doing my job.

BEN: You’re sick.

A little hard to follow, no? Also not particularly funny. I would think actors would have a bitch of a time trying to make sense of this scene.   

But here’s the twist: the play shows two parallel scenes (a la SLIDING DOORS). In one scenario Ben and Abby are lovers. In the other they’re co-workers. What I do to open the second act is to do both scenes with this exact same dialogue, but based on their relationships, they are two very different scenes.

Here they are, but this time with indicators and stage direction. First track: they’re lovers.

They are still in the afterglow of making love in the bathtub.

BEN: Let’s not let what just happened affect this evening.

ABBY: (a compliment) Don’t be so hot.

BEN: (anxious to get back to it) We won’t stay too long.

Abby gives him a quick peek of cleavage inside the dress.

ABBY: (sotto) I got nothing on.

BEN: Lucky me.

Abby’s hand discreetly brushes across Ben’s crotch.

ABBY: You’re vibrating.

BEN: (it’s obvious why) Hello?

ABBY: (looking around) We got two bars in here.

BEN: (looking around) No Ted.

Abby’s hand brushes his crotch again. He clearly reacts.

ABBY: (to his reaction) You’ve got a hang up.

BEN: (discreetly brushing her hand away) Later.

ABBY: (sotto, impressed) What a tool.

BEN: (slightly embarrassed) This is not the place.

ABBY: (pointedly, suggestive) I’m just doing my “job.”

BEN: (ultimate compliment) You are "sick."

And now the alternate version.  They're strictly co-workers.  Ben wanted to make love. Abby refused.

Same beginning. But no afterglow. Their body language is much stiffer and professional.

BEN: Let’s not let what just happened affect this evening.

ABBY: (hot meaning angry) Don’t be so hot.

BEN: We won’t stay long.

Abby shrugs. She’s got no plans.

ABBY: I got nothing on.

BEN: (sarcastic) Lucky me.

Ben’s phone buzzes in his pocket.

ABBY: (re phone) You’re vibrating.

Ben pulls out his cellphone and answers it.

BEN: (into phone) Hello?

Abby takes out her cellphone and checks the reception.

ABBY: (re receptions) We got two bars in here.

BEN: (on phone) No, Ted.

ABBY: (re phone) You’ve gotta hang up.

BEN: (on phone) Later.

He hangs up and returns the phone to his pocket.

ABBY: (re Ted) What a tool.

BEN: (scolding) This is not the place.

ABBY: (defending) I’m just doing my job.

BEN: (disgusted) You are sick!

The fun of the sequence was that practically each line had double meaning. I never could have conveyed that just in the dialogue.

No, I wouldn’t pepper my scripts with parentheticals, but every now and again you need to declare your clear intent. Don’t be afraid to do that. At the end of the day it’s YOUR script. There may be better ways but at least see your way first.

And another thing: If you’re writing a spec it’s primarily made to be read. Readers hate parentheticals a lot less than actors do.

Supergirl is becoming Supertrain

When SUPERGIRL premiered I gave it a good review. Well done pilot, likable star, nifty action, and the tone was fun. The debut numbers were terrific (for 2015… if a show premiered with those numbers in 1975 it would be yanked from the schedule that week). Since Oct. 26th the ratings have been steadily tumbling. I was curious as to why so went back and screened the subsequent episodes.

I get it now. The scripts are all made of Kryptonite.

Within three weeks the SUPERGIRL series has become seriously stupid.

Clearly, the staff is flailing around searching for what this show is, and it doesn’t take X-Ray Vision to see they haven’t found it. To me, if feels like they’re letting research dictate the direction, trying to satisfy every target demographic.

Since superhero shows traditionally attract men, they’re going out of their way to get women into the tent. It’s not an action show; it’s really about women getting the chance to be empowered. She’s a role model for feminism. SUPERGIRL is important.

Okay, well that didn’t seem to work. SUPERGIRL has not replaced Sheryl Sandberg. So in order to attract women, they hit hard on emotional stories. Working through family relationships. In the sappiest possible way. The Thanksgiving episode was like every bad Lifetime Movie where Meredith Baxter died from the disease of the week.

But to play it safe, women always like romantic comedy. Give them that. Supergirl likes Jimmy Olsen but he likes someone else and the sweet guy in the office (who is probably gay) likes her but she can’t see it. And she goes out on bad dates. Oh, poor Supergirl.

Upscale Millennials must be served if CBS ever hopes to get Lexus on board. So Supergirl works in a slick upscale corporation with sets probably rejected from Nancy Meyer movies. Hmmmm. That might not be enough. What they need is a horrible boss. Yes, Millennials loved those horrible boss movies. Give Supergirl one of those. So they created the Calista Flockhart character who is such a cliché she struggles to be one-dimensional.

But wait. The show still needs male viewers. So throw in monsters, mutants, and miscellaneous rejects from WALKING DEAD with super powers so Supergirl can beat the crap of them. And of course, there needs to be a made-up covert government organization in a secret location that looks like rejected BLACK LIST sets so we can check the conspiracy box. Conveniently, this secret compound just happens to be in the city where Supergirl resides. What are the odds? Oh, and throw her sister in there as an operative because, well… what the hell do you do with the sister?

Stunt casting is a must. Helen Slater (the original Supergirl) and Dean Cain (Superman from LOIS & CLARK) are Supergirl’s parents. What amazing gets! And Superman himself makes cameo appearances. In one episode he saved Supergirl. Touching but it also eliminates a lot of suspense because at any time Superman can just fly in and save her. But I’m sure research said you must include the Man of Steel. Especially on CBS. They had Superman appear on I LOVE LUCY you’ll recall.

Supergirl also has to stay up with the times. And today that means there is a faction that is anti-Supergirl. All she does is avert disasters, save lives, and stop crime but citizens are ready to get out the pitchforks and torches. Don’t they have a Ben Carson rally to attend? Leave Supergirl alone.  It's bad enough she can't get dates. 

By trying to be all things to all people the show has managed to please no one. Pick a direction. Or maybe go in an alternate one. What seems interesting to me is SUPERGIRL as a metaphor for how hard it is for women to have it all. The conflict of Kara trying to maintain a career, having a personal life, and saving the world is an interesting one. As it is now she goes from office responsibilities to vanquishing transformers to checking in at C.I.Alien HQ to baking pies with relative ease. You’d think not all bank robberies would occur during lunch breaks.

I hope they can figure it out. Like I said, I liked the pilot. And it’s not like superhero series don’t work. I’m surprised NBC doesn’t make Carson Daly wear a cape. But more attention must be paid to the scripts than the effects. CGI can’t create good drama. Nor can focus groups.

Writers are getting royally screwed... AGAIN

There is a new insidious practice studios and networks are getting away with.

PAPER PARTNERS

If two writers form a partnership they understand going in that they’ll be paid essentially the salary of one writer. They choose to do that because they feel the product is ultimately better, their careers will rise faster as a result, and it’s a perk in hiring because the showrunner gets two for the price of one.

But here’s what studios and networks are doing, especially for entry-level positions: They’ll take two young writers, who have been writing solo, and just tell them they’re now a partnership. As a result, each makes only 50% and the studio gets two-for-one. Think: shotgun weddings.

NOTE:  To be clear, these writers are being hired on STAFF, not just writing a script.  And often if you're just a staff writer you don't even get a script assignment.   You're just working full-time for half the salary.  

The young writers of course are powerless to do anything about this. If they refuse, the studio just shrugs, and gets the next person. I know young writers who worked full-time on staff and didn’t make enough money to qualify for health insurance. Meanwhile, each writer pays full dues to the WGA. 

This is a despicable practice, and what hurts the most is that WRITERS are letting it happen. Showrunners are not standing up to the studio and saying they refuse to go along. I mean, you expect the studios to screw us royally. But writers are permitting this unconscionable practice to continue.  To me, that's disgraceful.   They're worse than scabs. 

The WGA claims they don’t receive too many complaints about this. Well OF COURSE NOT! A young writer trying to break in is not going to blow the whistle on a major Hollywood studio. Get real.

It’s OUR job as writers to stop this. I know the incoming WGA president, Howard Rodman, is aware of this problem, and I hope he takes steps to address it. But the real culprits are the showrunners who are allowing their fellow members to be victimized. I’m sure there are a few asshole showrunners who actually LIKE this practice because they can take advantage of it. But I am hoping the majority are decent people who realize what an injustice this is, and have empathy for young writers just as someone had for them when they broke in.    This practice ends when showrunners have the balls to say to studios they won't accept it.

And if a young writer pays full dues and works full-time on a show he at least should be entitled to health insurance.   What kind of a union are we that we can't even provide THAT? 

Obviously, this is not an issue we are going to go out on strike for, but it’s serious, and makes us writers look toothless and heartless.

Stop Paper Partners.  Young writers deserve better.